Liverpool & Everton – The Case For & Against Ground-Sharing

Ground-sharing, although commonplace in the rest of Europe, has always been something of an anathema in England. The very existence of both Liverpool and Everton started with a row over rental rates at Anfield. Everton had baulked at an increase in rent at Anfield, which led to them leaving for Goodison Park and the ground’s owner John Houlding forming a new club, Liverpool FC, to play at the stadium. One hundred and twenty years on from that fateful row, there still hasn’t been a successful case of two clubs sharing the same stadium at the top end of English football but the question of whether it makes sense for two clubs in such close proximity to build two separate stadia has been raised again by Warren Brady, the head of Liverpool City Council and the head of the city’s bid to be included in the 2018 World Cup. Brady states that, “we’ve got to do something if we are serious about being a bidding city for the World Cup” and that, “I don’t want to see everything migrate down the M62 to Manchester where there are two fabulous stadiums”.

It’s important to correct Brady on one important detail. The city of Liverpool will almost certainly not lose out to Manchester in bidding for the 2018 World Cup. FIFA rules state that, under normal circumstances, one city may have two facilities and the remaining host cities would ordinarily have one each. It is impossible to believe that the FA would not select London as the city with two stadia (Wembley and The Emirates Stadium would be the obvious choices), so there is little chance of the FA saying “no” to Liverpool and “yes” to both Old Trafford and The City of Manchester Stadium. It does raise the question of whether Brady is politicking here, and what his motives might be. Certainly, Liverpool City Council have given indications of being being in favour of Liverpool and Everton sharing a stadium before. However, there is certainly an argument of sorts to be made for Everton and Liverpool sharing a facility, so here are the arguments for and against Liverpool and Everton becoming bedmates.

Against: There is a convincing argument that a ground-sharing arrangement would be very much to the detriment of Everton Football Club. They may well be equal partners in any proposed new stadium, but the perception may well take place that they are the junior partners there and it may have a seriously detrimental effect on their ability to continue to attract new supporters. Having their own stadium is part of their distinct identity, and it’s difficult to escape the idea that should they lose this, they may struggle to find a new one.

The arguments over history and tradition are less convincing, but it is worth pointing out that setting a precedent for clubs sharing facilities at the very top of the game could have ramifications throughout the whole of English football. The motives of Liverpool, Everton and Liverpool City Council may be entirely innocent, but there are plenty of people that are involved in football to make a fast buck and that would be delighted to have a precedent allowing them to merge clubs and merge facilities coming from the Premier League.

It’s also worth pointing out that a 2018 World Cup bid will not stand or fall on whether Liverpool and Everton share a stadium, and that concerns over the loss of identity of at least one of these two clubs shouldn’t be over-ridden by the desire to host football in the city at a World Cup finals which hasn’t even been awarded to England yet. Quite regardless of this, it wouldn’t take a massive amount of tweaking to bring Anfield up to the required standard to host World Cup football. Liverpool City Council have made noises to the effect that they would prefer the two clubs to play in one stadium, and there is a valid case to make that they could be scaremongering about the World Cup bid in order to make this happen.

For: The case in favour of Everton and Liverpool sharing a stadium is based on both practical and hypothetical considerations. Most pressing of all is the issue of what the alternatives for the two clubs are. Liverpool are £350m in debt and struggling to maintain interest payments on the debt that they already have. It seems as if they will be staying at Anfield for the forseeable future whether they like it or not. Gillett and Hicks may or may not be able to fund a new stadium, but whether Liverpool FC will be able to afford to build a stadium that is considerably bigger than the one that they already have is a different matter.

Everton, on the other hand, have pinned all of their hopes on a move outside of the city to Kirkby. There is a groundswell of opinion amongst the club’s support against this move, and a ground share with Liverpool in the city might be seen by them as being preferable to moving away and ground-sharing with Tesco instead. Ultimately, neither club is in a great position to build the sort of facility that they would like to. A pooling of resources would enable them to build a stadium within the city that both can be proud of. Even those in favour of the move to Kirkby have to concede that the decision to give planning permission for a new stadium there has been kicked from pillar to post. There is a not unreasonable chance that they might end up not getting planning permission to go there regardless of whether the supporters want to or not, leaving them stuck at Goodison Park.

The fact of the matter is that ground-sharing does work on the continent. The clubs of Milan, Munich and Rome are amongst those that have not lost their identity as a result of playing in the same stadium. If the two clubs can be persuaded to work as equal partners (because one suspects that an element of the support of both clubs will believe that they are putting in all the money whilst the others reap all of the benefits), then there is precedent from abroad to say that it can work. Only a fool would say that Milan and Internazionale don’t have distinct identities as clubs.

The problem for both Liverpool and Everton lies in the past. There has been so much procrastination over new grounds for the two clubs over the last twenty or thirty years that both clubs stood comparatively still during the 1990s. Even accounting for the recession, both Liverpool and Everton would still be faced with astronomical costs should they wish to move, regardless of where they end up going. It is perhaps an indication that football supporters are much less sentimental than we might have thought that they might be that there doesn’t seem to be a significant amount opposition to Liverpool leaving Anfield. Liverpool FC is, perhaps, more closely associated with its stadium than any other club in England, but there has never been any significant opposition to simply upping sticks and leaving it behind.

For Everton, the issue is a subtly different one. They are in a more advanced position with regard to moving to a new stadium, but it is a move that their supporters seem less than happy with. These supporters may be more inclined to support sharing a stadium because it will at least keep them within the city of Liverpool, and the possibility of staying at a cramped Goodison Park continuing to loom on the horizon means that such a move may start to look even more appealing if they don’t get permission to share a supermarket with Tesco on the outskirts of a sleeper town which stretches the very definition of where the city boundaries of Liverpool begin and end to its very limit.

Ultimately, it seems unlikely (if not implausible) that Liverpool and Everton will both end up in 50,000 capacity grounds of their own in Liverpool, regardless of any debates over whether they should build their own grounds or share one. It is, therefore, important that discussion of where these two clubs end up is written from the perspective of which will benefit their supporters the most. From a personal – and neutral – perspective, whilst it is understandable that both sets of supporters have valid concerns over sharing a stadium, both clubs will have to make difficult decisions to make.

Gillett and Hicks have already shown themselves to be plenty capable of spending vast amounts of money with no significant benefit having been seen, and it would be unsurprising if staying at Anfield ended up being preferable to any plan that they could concoct. Certainly, they can ill afford having their current levels of indebtedness doubled at the very least. Everton supporters have a subtly different problem to face. If permission to move to Kirkby – which is far from assured – is granted, it will still not mean that the stadium will be built. The time to protest against it, however, is now.

About The Author

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

7 Comments

why would everton want to share if hicks and gillett stay liverpool will be bankrupt also as reguards to kirkby ask ant one who lives there are they a scouser you be told two rigth we are also where do liverpool fc have there acadamy is it not kirkby we got the money so lets embace the move onwards and up wards coyb

Gareth Fieldstead on June 8, 2009 at 11:57 am

Your wording seems awfully familiar, your not KEIOC are you? Kirkby is Liverpool end of, everyone from Kirkby call themselves scousers and it is as much Liverpool as Walton or Anfield. Everton have no other viable alternative other than Kirkby and the thought of finding nearly 150 million for a shared stadium is laughable. Bradley is an utter tool end of. He has been nothing other than obstructive towards Everton, and he calls himself a blue, what a joke! From the move to Kirkby, the selling of Bellefield and the ongoing push for alternative sites says everything about the man. I hope Evertonians remember what damage this man has done to our club when he is in search of votes at the next local election. We will get our stadium built and it will be a case of onwards and upwards.

jrf63 on June 8, 2009 at 12:19 pm

I suppose in the light of current events globally that a groundshare of a 65.000 stadium would be of benefit to Everton and Liverpool . the costs would be halved so that approx 175m each…easily affordable . If you look at the munich stadium when bayern play it’s lit up RED , and when 1860 play its BLUE…problem sorted…I fully understand the issue of ‘roots’ and heritage , but place this alongside the other possibility which is potentailly going down the table. Liverpool aren’t in a good financial position andlimited , Everton have won nothing under Moyes and are unlikely to in the near future and both are handicapped by smaller stadiums than the other big competetitors except Chelsea who are privately bankrolled anyway . AVFC have Learner who has cash and portsmouth and City now have very wealthy backers….not a gr8 future. I say build and be damned as not build and be damned anyway.

tony on June 8, 2009 at 3:51 pm

There is no chance of Liverpool sharing with Everton as Hicks and Gillett know how much they will make from the new stadium, People suggesting Liverpool are skint are deluding themselves. Liverpool generate lots of money alone unlike Everton and the finance required will be found no doubt at all, Everton could not afford their share of the stadium or even fiil it with fans. We can wait for the right financial climate before going ahead with the build and leave Everton to sort themselves out.

ive always been a fan of milan and inter sharing the same stadium, theres doubt that it can work in the epl but im sure it will work out in the end.

Paul Blackwell on June 15, 2009 at 10:05 am

Attn Everton fans : ‘Manchester’ United play on an out of town site in Stretford within the borough of Trafford on the edge of a huge industrial estate that is actually Manchester in postcode only and have done since 1910. Goodison is a fabulous place. It reeks history. But now it’s a millstone around your club’s neck and it’s time to move on.

lain on November 26, 2009 at 7:32 pm

Anfield to me is our spiritual home,any fan should feel that!we must have our own ground,a shared ground is just a pitch unless its your own.I would rather watch liverpool play at the local park than share, it has nothing to do with who we share with or how much better off financially we will be or even how great the facilities will be,Its is a spiritual matter !i beg LFC fans to reject the share it will rip the heart out of both clubs.